Two House bills seek to reverse annulment law

Legislators eye reversing recent state law change

Annulled criminal records should be kept secret, the way they were before state law changed two years ago, say two state representatives sponsoring separate legislation to reverse state law and make the records secret again.

Comment

By Elizabeth Dinan

seacoastonline.com

By Elizabeth Dinan

Posted Jan. 6, 2013 at 2:00 AM
Updated Jan 6, 2013 at 9:55 AM

By Elizabeth Dinan

Posted Jan. 6, 2013 at 2:00 AM
Updated Jan 6, 2013 at 9:55 AM

» Social News

Annulled criminal records should be kept secret, the way they were before state law changed two years ago, say two state representatives sponsoring separate legislation to reverse state law and make the records secret again.

One of the representatives, Nashua Democrat Joel Winters, said he's sponsoring a bill that, if passed, would make annulled criminal records available only to the person who had the crime annulled, their attorney, a court of law, or members of law enforcement. To all others, the information wouldn't exist.

"I have a friend who is an attorney, who helps clients who made a mistake and want to move on," Winters explained. "This legislation makes it easier to do that."

Following two years of study and legislative testimony, the law was changed in 2011 to keep information about annulled crimes unsealed. Previously, once a judge approved an annulment, the cases were sealed, gag orders were imposed and court clerks weren't allowed to even speak about annulled records.

News organizations were barred from reporting about annulled crimes, or they faced civil penalties. Law breakers who had convictions annulled responded with demands that reports about their crimes be deleted from electronic news archives.

Rep. J.R. Hoell, R-Dunbarton, said he thinks that was "fair" for people who committed crimes and didn't want their criminal records hampering their job prospects. He too has sponsored a proposed bill to amend state annulment law.

"Say you had a conviction 25 years ago for smoking a joint, should it now prevent you from getting a job?" he asked. "Just like online court documents, it lives on forever on the Internet."

Portsmouth resident and former state representative Jim Splaine was on a legislative study committee that endorsed the current law to keep criminal records public. He said Friday that he'd fight attempts to reverse it.

"If the effort is to make annulled criminal records secret again, I'm certainly opposed and I'll offer testimony as to why it's important to keep the new law the way it is and why we made the changes we did two years ago," he said. "Government at all levels has an obligation to keep the public informed, and the fewer secrets in a democracy that we have the better."

Splaine said "covering up wrongdoing by burying that information" is against the public's best interest and could lead to "further wrongdoing."

"And in the age of the Internet, making it illegal for reporters or anyone else to share information that they have with others is the worst kind of government control," he said.

When it comes to job searches, said Splaine, "information about criminal wrongdoing has to be able to be shared."

"Old-hat laws that try to cover up wrongdoing are outdated and whether a reporter or anyone else shares that information should not itself become illegal," he said.

Rockingham County Attorney Jim Reams agrees.

"There's nothing in the present statute that doesn't allow people to move on," Reams said. "What they want to do is act as if it never happened."

Hoell said he filed his proposed bill to reverse the annulment law at the request of constituents.

"I personally don't care," he said. "But I've had constituents say they spent thousands of dollars for an annulment, then asked what good was it?"

The cost to annul a criminal record is $300, with $100 each going to the relevant court, the Department of Corrections for a criminal investigation, and the Department of Safety to change the record if an annulment is granted. If a lawyer is retained to assist, the cost goes up accordingly.

Annulments must be granted by a judge and if a criminal charge is dismissed, or a defendant is found not guilty, requests for annulments can be granted immediately.

Requests for annulments of violation-level offenses can be made a year after convictions, and three years after convictions for misdemeanor convictions. Class B felonies require a five-year wait and petitions for Class A felony annulments can be made 10 years after a conviction.

Some crimes, including murder, robbery and witness tampering, cannot be annulled, according to state law.

Reams said it's his opinion that annulment is "more to hide from employers."

"It doesn't mean we take a magic wand and it never happened," the county attorney said. "People call newspapers and TV stations and say take the stories down (after annulment). But it was true at the time. It's fine the way it is. Every interest of society has been balanced very well."

Concord attorney Seth Hipple drafted an amendment to the annulment law on behalf of Rep. Winters and said he supports the portion of the current law decriminalizing "the act of revealing an annulled criminal record."

"But the change that recently passed goes too far," he said. "Now a person with a criminal conviction can never have that conviction removed from their state police criminal record. They can never move on."

Hipple said that hurts people with convictions, some dating back to long-ago college days, who are job-seeking "in a tough job market."

"The only people who could get annulments in the first place were people who had paid their debt to society and could convince a judge that their annulment would help in their rehabilitation and serve the public interest," he said. "Now they can still get an annulment, but their annulled record is still visible to employers. The bill that I helped to draft would allow courts and law enforcement to access an annulled criminal record, but restores the ability to remove an old conviction from the public eye."